Introduction Section for Research Papers

Introduction Section for Research Papers

The introduction is an important and challenging part of any research paper as it establishes your writing style, the quality of your research, and your credibility as a scholar. It is your first chance to make a good impression on your reader.

The introduction gives the reader background and context to convey the importance of your research. It should begin by broadly introducing your topic, then narrowing to your focused research question or hypothesis.

What is the Purpose of an Introduction Section?

The introduction should answer three important questions:

1.     What am I writing about?

2.     Why is it important?

3.     What do I want the reader to know about it?

An introduction should establish the topic with a strong opening that grabs the reader’s attention before giving an overview of recent research on your chosen topic. Avoid going too in-depth in the introduction; deep dives into your topic should be saved for the body of the paper. Background and historical context help explain to the reader why your research is important.

The type of information you share will vary by discipline. As you reach the end of the introduction, you should begin to establish what you want the reader to know about your topic and research. This may include your focus and scope, the problem statement, and your specific research question(s), hypotheses, or objectives. Again, the information you choose to share here will vary depending on your discipline. It is always a good idea to check major academic journals within your field for examples of current best practices.

Example of a Qualitative Introduction with Annotations

This sample involves qualitative data, which is descriptive data involving language, themes, and ideas about the human experience. Many social sciences use this form of data, collected using surveys, interviews, and archival material.

[Broad Introduction to Topic] Indigenous peoples make up over 5% of the world’s population, their territories comprise at least 20% of the land area of the planet, and these lands host an estimated 80% of the world’s biodiversity (Stevens 2014). [Narrowing of the Topic] The relationships between indigenous land tenure and biological diversity is a challenging area of research, but several studies suggest that indigenous peoples’ place-based values, institutions, and practices help promote biodiversity. [Indicating Importance of Research and Step 1: Establishing a Territory] Indigenous lands often support higher native and rare species richness (Redford and Stearman 1993, Peres 1994, Arcese et al. 2014) and lower rates of deforestation (Nolte et al. 2013, Ceddia et al. 2015). [Step 2: Establishing a Niche] However, beyond a handful of studies looking at biodiversity and land use change, few researchers have looked at the broader ecological outcomes of indigenous land tenure.

[Specific Background Context] Indigenous peoples in Wisconsin manage forestlands and wildlife by merging professional standards of forestry and wildlife practice with their own culturally specific traditional ecological knowledge and land-based values. Although commercial and ecological forestry best-practices are utilized in tribal forestry programs, indigenous communities’ own knowledge systems and values have a strong influence. This has often led to distinct forest and wildlife management goals, institutions, and practices (Trosper 2007, Dockry 2012, Reo and Whyte 2012). Indigenous forestry in the United States and Canada has several unique aspects (Bengston 2004). [Introducing Case Study] The Cherokee Nation of Oklahoma, for example, plants a diverse suite of culturally significant tree species and favors nonchemical methods of land clearing that promote the growth of food and medicinal plants while protecting harvesters’ health (Carroll 2015).

[Introducing Secondary Case Study] Anishnaabe of Shoal Lake in Northwestern Ontario use succession management via landscape burning and timber harvest to promote biodiversity and support local livelihoods (Berkes and Davidson-Hunt 2006). Indigenous forestry outside North America includes managing sacred forest groves that promote bird diversity in Tibet (Brandt et al. 2013) and agri-forestry practices by Yoruba in Nigeria that integrate cash crops and trees, limiting soil erosion and increasing soil fertility (Warren and Pinkston 1998).

Indigenous Nations and nonindigenous forest and wildlife managers generally profess similar goals typically centered around sustaining resource values and yields, biological diversity, and ecosystem productivity despite some differences. [Occupying the Niche] Do these shared goals lead to similar outcomes on the lands managed by these two groups? Here, we explore that question within the specific context of northern Wisconsin where a mix of private industrial, private nonindustrial, and county, state, and national public forestlands surround four major “Indian reservations,” i.e., lands under jurisdiction of Indigenous Nations in the U.S. (Fig. 1A).

[Stating Research Focus and Objectives] This study thus fits within existing literature concerning the foundations and outcomes of indigenous forest and wildlife management. Our focus here, however, is to quantify the ecological outcomes of forest and wildlife management and links between the two. [Stating Research Question] That is, have the land-based values and practices of indigenous peoples in Wisconsin led to significantly different ecological conditions on their forestlands relative to neighboring lands? [Brief Roadmap] In the discussion, we return to the question of how differences in values and goals contribute to the differences in outcomes we document.

Source: Waller, D., and Reo, N., “First stewards: ecological outcomes of forest and wildlife stewardship by indigenous peoples of Wisconsin, USA,” Ecology and Society, 2018.